Passim

Mandamus decisions / District of Columbia

Rahman v. Blinken

District of ColumbiaJohn D. BatesDecided September 27, 2024No. 1:23-cv-03235

Read the decisionOriginal on CourtListener

2,917 written decisions from 2,664 cases in the whole mandamus and agency-delay group, the group's newest decided October 30, 2026. Updated November 3, 2026 at 7:07 a.m. CT; the Passim connector counts the live collection, which can differ by the day's additions and retirements (which total to quote). Coverage: of the 1,606 public decisions since January 1, 2025 that a CourtListener and GovInfo search for mandamus and agency delay finds, Passim holds 1,371 (85%), measured November 3, 2026. Some of what that search finds are not mandamus decisions. Tell us about a decision we're missing.

These are counts of past written decisions and dockets, not predictions of how any case will be decided. A distribution appears only when at least 5 decisions (or 5 dockets) are behind it; smaller groups are listed, not summarized. How it's counted.

What the decision decided

Each value cites the passage it was read from. Values read by a model were checked against that passage; values read by rule come from fixed text patterns. Read the decision before relying on either.

Agency Department of State Read by a model
He thus seeks a court order compelling the State Department to adjudicate his appeal of his COM revocation, as well as a court order setting aside his COM revocation.
Form or filing DS-260 (immigrant visa) Read by a model
he still seeks an SIV for himself and his family members, and the adjudication of that visa application requires consular processing.
What the suit asked for Some other action Read by a model
He thus seeks a court order compelling the State Department to adjudicate his appeal of his COM revocation, as well as a court order setting aside his COM revocation.
Kind of order A ruling on a motion or the petition Read by a model
the Court will grant the State Department’s motion to dismiss and will dismiss plaintiffs’ amended complaint without prejudice.
Motion decided Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction; Motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim Read by a model
The State Department moved to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
Whose motion The government's motion Read by a model
Before the Court is the State Department’s motion to dismiss Rahman’s complaint.
Disposition Dismissed The case or every delay claim was dismissed for a reason other than mootness. Read by a model
For the reasons explained above, the Court will grant the State Department’s motion to dismiss and will dismiss plaintiffs’ amended complaint without prejudice.
Prevailing party Government Read by a model
For the reasons explained above, the Court will grant the State Department’s motion to dismiss and will dismiss plaintiffs’ amended complaint without prejudice.
The delay claim Dismissed Read by a model
The Court concludes that Rahman’s unreasonable delay claims will interfere with the ongoing Allies litigation addressing that same question and hence will dismiss Counts One Two, and Three without prejudice.
The other claims Dismissed Read by a model
the Court will grant the State Department’s motion to dismiss and will dismiss plaintiffs’ amended complaint without prejudice.
Months pending 25.5 months from the application to the suit; 36.4 months from the application to the court's decision Read by a model
Rahman appealed the revocation on September 14, 2021; his appeal remains pending.
TRAC factors The court did not weigh the TRAC factors Read by a model
Threshold rulings Consular nonreviewability rejected Read by a model
Rahman’s unreasonable delay claims would not be barred by the consular nonreviewability doctrine
Nationality Afghanistan Read by a model
Dr. Abdul Bari Rahman is a non-citizen, Afghan national currently residing in the United States on a two-year humanitarian parole.

How the case ended

Docket
No. 1:23-cv-03235
Filed
October 30, 2023
Ended
October 1, 2024
Suit's filing to its end
337 days
How it ended
Dismissed on jurisdiction or the merits
From the record
idb disp 6 (judgment: motion before trial), judgment for defendant

A voluntary or stipulated dismissal is how most suits end once the agency acts; the docket rarely says why. Other suits in this court.

Supreme Court and D.C. Circuit authority

District decisions bind no one. On the questions this decision raises, the Supreme Court decisions and the circuit's published decisions listed here bind this court; a circuit disposition marked nonprecedential was not published as precedent and is persuasive only. ImmCite status as read November 3, 2026. Check the current status before relying on one.